RESEARCH DEPARTMENT

MEASUREMENTS ON LOADED BUILDING-BOARD PANEL SOUND ABSORBERS

Report No. B-OSq

{ 1956/18)

A.N. Surd, B.Se. (W. Proctor Wi 1son)

-------~-~---------,

This Report is the property of the

British Br~adcasting Corporation and may
not be reproduced or disclosed to B
third party in any form without the
written permission ot the Corporation.
 Report No. B-064

MEASUREMENTS ON LOADED BUILDING-BOARD PANEL SOUND ABSORBERS

Section Title Page

SUMMARY. 1

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 EXPERIMENT AL WORK • 1

2.1. Reverberation Room Measurements • 1

2. 1. 1. Method 1
2.1.2. Results. 3

2.2. Duct Heasurements 5

2.2.1. Method 5
2.2.2. Results. 6

3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS • 7

4 CONCLUSIONS • 8

5 REFERENCES .. 8
 PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Report No. B-064

June 1956
( 1956/18 )

MEASUREMENTS ON LOADED BUILDING"~BOARD PANEL SOUND ABSORBERS

SUMMARY

Measurements have been made of the absorption coefficient of resonant

absorbers consisting of soft building-board panels loaded with steel weights. The
results do not substantiate the claims made by Continental workers because the mode
of action appears to be completely different from that postulated in a recent paper.

A possible explanation of the experimental results is suggested and some

measure of agreement with theory found.

1. INTRODUCTION.

A recent paper by Lauber I described resonant absorbers similar to those due

to von BraunmUhJ. and Westphal consisting of panels of soft building-board mounted on
wooden frames; steel weights were bolted to the centre of the panels and a blanket of
glasswool could be mounted behind the panel to provide damping.

Peaks in the absorption coefficient were reported at frequencies between

80 c/s and 200 c/s according to the dimensions of the panel and the load applied.
Thus a peak was obtained at 86 c/s with a panel 79 cm x 104 cm, a frame 21 cm deep and
a load of 2-5 kg at the centre; removal of the load raised the peak frequency to
190 c/s. Some agreement was claimed between the experimentally measured resonance
frequencies and the values calculated on the basis of a formula also used by Kurtze 2 ,
assuming that the weight a.nd panel vibrate in a simple manner against the spring
stiffness.of the enclosed air.

Since these absorbers are coming into widespread use in Switzerland and
elsewhere 3 , it was decided that an independent investigation should be made to
supplement the published results. These absorbers appeared inferior, in respect of
maximum absorption coefficient and bandwidth, to the membrane absorbers extensively
used in B.B.C. studios, but might have applications as narrow band absorbers in
special circumstances. Building-board panels of approximately the same size were
therefore mounted as described and the absorption characteristics were determined,
initially by the reverberation room method and later in an impedance tube.

2. EXPERIMENTAL IDRK.

2.1. Reverberation Room Measurements.

2. 1. 1. Method.

Measurements were made in a reverberation room of volume 3280 ft S (90 mS )

with a reverberation time of approximately 8 sec at 90 c/s falling to 1'1 sec at
8 kc/so At the lower frequencies short pulses of tone, of duration 3 cycles each,
2

were used as the exciting sound; they were generated by a constant bandwidth pulse
generator 4 and gave an effective bandwidth of 1/3 octave around each test frequency.
Above 2 kc/s, however, longer pulses of warbled tone were used since insufficient
energy was supplied by the short pulses, and the warble tone measurements were in some
instances extended over the whole frequency range as a check of the agreement between
the two sources of sound.

A loudspeaker in a corner of the room was used as the source. The sound in
the room was picked up by a moving coil microphone, amplified to a suitable level,
passed through octave band-pass filters and applied to a logarithmic amplifier.
The output from the logarithmic amplifier was displayed on an oscilloscope and
the reverberation time was read directly by means of a goniometer mounted on the
oscilloscope as described in a previous reports. Results from ten microphone
positions were averaged at each frequency.

Four frames, each 6 ft x 4 ft (l'S m x 1'2 m) and divided into two sections
3 ft x 4 ft (0'9 m x 1'2 m) as shown in Fig. 1, were used for measurements. Each
carried a sheet of building-board ~ in. (1'2 cm) thick, nailed round its edges and
across the dividing line. Damping in the form of 1 in. (2·5 cm) rockwool was fastened
behind, but not touching, the building-board panel which was backed by an air space
3~ in. (9 cm) deep. Alternative weights of 2' 5 and 1·0 kg were used as in Reference 1.

6 ft.CI. 8m)---------~
.. 1
1
-------" -
-
1

I
1 I'
l,
1 11 1
1 11
1
1 11 1
1 11 1
1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
1
1
A 1
1
1
-8-- 11
11
11
11
-
8 i
1
1
A 4ft
(1.2 m)
1 11 1
1 11 1
1 11 1 I

J
1 11 I
1 11 I
1 11 I
1 11 I
1L ________________ 11 ~L ________________ J1

Fig.1 - Building-board panel resonator

 3

Total absorption values were obtained from the measured reverberation times
by application of Eyring's formula:

0'049 V
-8 log. (1- a) s

where T reverberation time

8 area
a average absorption coefficient

I I

0·5
11
]\ )(

0- - - - -
~( PonlZl loodqd (205 k 9 woigh1:s)

--oPanol loadod (1-0 kg w.ights) -

1/1\\ ',;\ I i : : r - - - - c , Panol unloadod

"o
u
v-'x;, f\ I
I
;

I -- foo
..,><
c 0-3
..
o I
I
"} If. ~-- V --6

~. ? /
Cl.

~
.0 ~
I
>1."
-_....
« 0'2

~~
h~
~
V
~~
NF
0·1

0000000
'4' tt'I.o,....COo-o
'"'"'"
~.

Frequency, cls

Fi g. 2 - Reverberation room measu rement

2. 1. 8. Resul ts.

The results showed a peak in the absorption coefficient at about 120 cls,
which did not move with variation of the load, (see Fig. 2) although a small increase
in the peak height was found with the heavier weights.

It was thought unlikely that a weight of 2'5 kg would oscillate at such a

high frequency when suspended at the centre of so compliant a panel. Static
depression measurements indicated a fundamental frequency in the region of 10 cls
which was confirmed approximately by observation on shock excitation of the panel.
It was therefore clear that the panel and weight were not vibrating in a simple mode
and experiments were carried out with an accelerometer attached to different parts of
the panel (Fig. 3). The panel was driven by approximately plane waves at 125 cls,
corresponding to the frequency of the absorption peak, and the excitation determined
along lines through the centre of the weight under the different conditions of loading.
The results show, as was expected, that the weight constrains the centre of the panel,
wholly or partially, while the remainder of the panel vibrates. Thus the 2'5 kg
weight reduces the vibration at the centre to the same extent as the frame to which
the building-board is nailed and the 1'0 kg weight also reduces the excitation at the
4

centre but to a lesser degree.

3D
With the unloaded panel,
...
."
however, a peak is found at the
centre and there is a sharp
~ 25
tE nodal ring round the centre
f with the panel vibrating
.
!!!
~ 20
strongly on both sides of it •
"
E
...e
~,~ / "'!. I \ The inside dimensions

~ 15 ~-1H---+---r--~1-~~~+T--+-~\~--4---~-- 1.- \ X\ / I'\J ' of the panel were 118 cm x 88 cm

and the depth of air space
ac y.... \/ \ I /\ ~,I 9-3 cm. The weight of the
.~
'" / \ A I ; 'I I
1\ I
building-board was approximately
3 23 )g/m 2 • If we use the
\ J ;
0
-E
!!
~
10
/ I1 \ simple formula quoted by Lauber,
'0
"'"
i \ J \ / \ I
fo
l[I
:;
'0
0
:E
f'j
,
\ j!
I \ / \ :I \' 21TJ iF
D-
\1/ \/ \ I
where M = mass of the panel
o 4 6 7 S 9 10 " 12
F = compliance of the air
Distan« acro,s pan21 (arbitrary units)
V
Pan21 loaded (2-5 kg w.ights)
--0--------0 Pan21 loadad (1-0 kg w.ight.)
Poc 2
----t,----- -A Panll unloaded
V = volume of air enclosed
Po = normal densi ty of the
Fig. 3 - Di stri bution of vi bration amp] i tude across air
pane] c = veloci ty of sound

the calculated resonance frequency is 109 c/s. This agrees with the diagrams giYen
in his paper which show a resonance frequency of about 107 c/s.

These calculated results are rather lower than the measured Yalues, partly
due to the fact that the stiffness of the board is neglected. Kurtze's paper
suggests a stiffness correction of 30% to 40% for 40 cm square acoustic tiles, though
these would be expected to haye a greater inherent stiffness than the building,board.

It is possible to calculate a value for the resonance frequency of the

unloaded panel assuming that it vibrates as a stiffness controlled circular plate.
Obseryation of a nodal ring in the accelerometer measurements shows a similarity to a
circular plate vibrating in its first oyertone.

The formula for the resonance frequency as given in Reference 6 is:

where h half-thickness of plate

a = radius of equivalent cir.cular panel

_j ar ea
1T
Y Young's modulus of building-board
P = density of building-board
0-= Poisson's ratio of building-board
 5

Young's modulus was found, from measurements on a strip of the material, to

be 2'04 x 10 9 dynes/cm 2 • As the value of U does not affect the calculated value of
101 very critically, an assumed value of zero was taken as a good approximation for a
fibrous material of this type.

This formula gives a value of 15 c/s for the fundamental resonance freque,cy
and 58 c/s for the first overtone (102) of the unloaded panel controlled only by its
inherent stiffness.

A further value for this resonance frequency can be obtained from the
measured peak absorption frequency of the panel and the calculated value of the
compliance of the air enclosed behind it. Such a calculation gives a value of 59 c/s
for the stiffness controlled resonance.

Considering the case of a 2'5 kg weight supported on the panel and the whole
vibrating in its fundamental mode, we obtain a value of 11'5 c/s for the calculated
resonance frequency; this is in good agreement with the value derived from measure-
ments of the static stiffness taken previously.

These results and conclusions are irreconcilable with those of Lauber and it
was felt that this was an unsatisfactory point at which to leave the work. Duct
measurements were therefore carried out in an attempt to determine whether the method
of measurement affected the mode of operation.

2.2. Duct Measurements.

2. 2. 1. Method.

The duct at Kingswood Warren used for this work is of brick construction
wi th .a top of concrete slabs which can be removed. The dimensions of the duct
(0-6 m x 0'7~ m) are sufficiently small for the sound field up to a limiting frequency
of 300 c/s to be represented by two plane waves travelling in opposite directions. A
microphone on a trolley can be moved along the duct by means of a cable to measure the
signal level at different points, and hence determine the standing wave ratio. To
calculate the absorption coefficient a measurement of the ratio of PmBx/Pmin at the
first two minima away from the panel was required? This measurement was obtained
directly in decibels from an amplifier detector, using the equipment shown in the
block schematic of Fig. 4.

Mic.rophon2.
Pan.1
absorber

Fig. Ij. - Equipment used in duct measurements- block schematic diagram

6

2.2.2. Results.

The results are shown in Fig. 5. It may be seen that there are apparently
several peaks in the absorption coefficient in the region covered, whereas calculations
would lead one to expect a single resonance at 109 c/s. There is no significant
shift of the curve on change of loading of the panel and it is clear therefore tnat
the panel and weight were not vibrating in the simple manner assumed in Section 1
above.

0·9 ) I I I I I I I
)t )( Panel loaded (205 kg ...... ights)
0·8 l-
a- - - - - -oPan.1 load od (1.0 kg wtighu)

Lr-----i:J. Pantl unloadod

0·7 - I

j\
. 0·6
, 1~

~ J~\
I
c:
\
.!!

~ 0·5
./1 t I

u
0

~-1 ~ \' I'

I
~
-!"-" 0'4 ~ 11: l~ I

~.. \V\
\
1/ ~1
!\
...
Z>

0·3 L ~ :-- i--!

, ....
-{ ~ lL \
\
\
! I'I

~\
0·2 ' ....
r", \

',.,
\ a--_ ....-::; ~~ .
0·)
-......., ~
o
.... o
~
C>

'" ....o .. ...

C>
g
- -
~ ~
-
~:~~~2:g
-------N
..'"
'"
co
..,
~
<>
...
c

fr.quo ncy) c/s

Fig. 5 - Duct measurements

A large section of the rear of the resonator was removed and it was found
that the peak normally at 160 cls shifted in relation to the remainder of the curve.
This then would appear to be the peak controlled by the air stiffness. By taking
this experimental result and the value of 109 cls derived from the known depth of the
absorber, the resonance frequency of vibrations controlled purely by the stiffness of
the building-board can be calculated; the value so determined is 117 c/s. If now
the stiffness is assumed to be the same as in the first experiment and the smaller
mass vibrating taken into account, then a value of about 102 cls is indicated which is
in agreement with the value found here. A further value can be calculated as in the
previous case using the formula for a stiffness controlled plate vibrating in its
first overtone; this gives 102 = 138 c/s. Complete agreement of these figures
cannot be expected since the tightness of clamping of the edges of the board will
influence greatly the stiffness obtained and since the value calculated from peak
absorption frequency and air compliance depends to a considerable extent on the value
taken for the peak absorption frequency.
-
7

3. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.

It. is not possible to reconcile these results with those given by Lauber.
It appears that under the conditions of these measurements the weight used to load the
panel does not vibrate and no shift of the resonance frequency would be expected by
changing the mass of the weight.

In Lauber's results the calculated values given in the paper are in general
about 30 c/s lower than the measured values for the loaded panels, a discrepancy which
can be explained by the neglect of the stiffness of the board. When, however, the
results for the unloaded panels are considered there is no agreement between the
experimental results and those calculated from his figures.

If, further, values for the resonance frequency of his panels are calculated
on the assumption that the weight does not vibrate, in all but one case better
agreement is obtained with the experimental results than in his original calculations.

In Fig. 6 graphs are given comparing the absorption characteristics of

building-board panel absorbers with the B.B.C. roofing felt membrane absorbers.
Curves (a) and (b) are taken from Reference 1.and curves (c) and (d) measured by the
author. Curve (a) is a Swiss P.T.T. panel absorber loaded with a 1'0 kg weight and
measured in a duct; (b) is the only reverberation room measurement reported and is
for a similar panel loaded with 2' 23 kg. (The break in the curve between 200 and
300 c/s is shown in the original paper but is not explained.) Curve (c) is for a
building-board panel absorber loaded with a 1 kg weight and measured in the reverbera-
tion room. Curve (d) is a B.B.C. membrane absorber of similar depth, also measured
in a reverberation room. All these types are damped with glass- or rock-wool.

o·p Ix Q
lE
b
)( ~~~~u;.T.;;r.:.sorb2r; duct

~ ~'\. , C
0-- -----0 Swiss P.T.T. absorbe:r; revlrb2rotion
room meQsurement.

1:
0·8
I
I '\ &---- Su'lIding-board absorb.reas inF;g.2)
"- d
.. 0·7
\ 'X, *-- - - x B.B.C. inembrane absorb ...
~-; 0'6 If
o
u I
1\ ~,
'\.
c D'S
\
·f / '"'I'-. , '1'''

..
e-O'4
o
d./ I
'''~..... ,,~~ )--- --< --- '"

--
.0

. --- ,,'"
« 0·3
1'. r-.
b // "\
0·2

D·I
~p
C
. -r-r _.......... -'"
Q

.... :;: ..,

c coo ...... 0
S!
0
0
0
....
0
...
0
0
0
0
0
..,
Cl
0000 0 0
0
0
0
o
o
0
Co
0000
0000
0

'" '"
0000
..... cOQe>
-"
0
0
,.; ~. ...
o. ~ .. :. ~~~ . : . 2~
0
g•
N
fr.quo ncy, cls

Hg. 6 - Compari son of bu i) ding-board and membrane absorbers

It will be seen that the membrane absorber has a peak absorption as great
as the quoted value for the Swiss P.T.T. absorber and a bandwidth many times as great.
The building-board panel absorber (c) has a bandwidth comparable with that of a
membrane absorber but a much smaller peak absorption.
8

After the work described had been completed, Dr. von Braunmunl pointed out
in discussion that the weights used by him in his original experiments did not form
apprnximate point loading masses as those used by the Swiss P.T.T. and subsequently by
the author but were instead flat slabs of concrete covering an appreciable area of the
building-board panel and bolted to it at the four corners. Such an arrangement would
behave in some respects differently from the type used in the present experimehts and
would vary quite considerably according to the relative si'ze of plate and panel and
the method of fixing. Some tests were made using a steel weight of dimensions
7 in. x 9 in. n8, cm x 23 cm) bolted to the centre of a building~board panel 2 ft x
2 ft 6 in. '( 60 cm x 75 cm) but resonance in the simplest mode could still not be
obtained.

4. CONCLUSIONS.

1. The absorbers tested in this laboratory give results very different from
those published and the mode of action does not appear to be as postulated. It is
not possible to vary the resonance frequency by changing the weights on the centre of
the panel since the weights do not vibrate at these fre~lencies.

2. The resonance frequency of these building--board absorbers, as for the

membrane absorbers, must be adjusted by varying th~ depth of the air-space. The
membrane units, however,prove more amenable to calculation and the effective vibrating
mass can be varied by using single or double sheets of roofing felt.

3. The peak absorption obtained with the building:-board panel resonators is

less than with the roofing felt units.

5. REFERENCES.

1. Lauber, "Plattenresonatoren als Akustische Tiefton Absorber", Technische

Mitteilungen P.T.T. (Switzerland) XXXIII" No. 5, pp. 19&-197, (1955).

2. Kurtze, "Verbesserung der Wirksamkeit von Akust ikplatten durch Resonatoren",

Technische Mitteilungen P.T.T. (Switzerland) XXXII, No. 3, pp. 81-87,
(1954) •

3. Somerville, ''Visit to Switzerland", B.B.C. Research Department Report A-039.

4. B.B.C. Research Department Report now in preparation.

5. Somerville and Gilford, "Cathode Ray Displays of Acoustic Phenomena and

their Interpretatipn", B.B.C. Quarterly, Vol. 7, pp. :1:-13, (1952).

6. Morse, ''Vibration and Sound", p. 175, McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York
& London, (1936).

7. See for example Beranek, "Acoustic Measurements", p. 321, John Wiley & Sans
Inc., New York, (1950).

MM
Printed by B.B.C. Research Department, Kingswood Warren, Tadworth, Surrey